Someone commenting here the other day was comparing this country favorably to Pakistan (with particular reference to the recent assassination of a state governor there). Someone please remind me what's so much better here.

How many hate filled fundie Christians want to legally penalize gays and other whose differences offend them? How many hate filled right wingers want to deport and/or kill immigrants? And what about the mouth breathing minority that wants to see slavery made legal again?

Sorry I am not buying what you are selling about this place being all that much better.

I hope the Freedom Riders and Patriot Guard Riders show up en masse to handle the Westboro loonies in AZ as they have been doing at military funerals.

I have no idea how many of these lower life forms we have amongst us. The point I care about is- how much power do they wield, when compared to the power they wield in other countries? Right now, in Pakistan, the crazies are so numerous that the country is rapidly descending into the status of a failed state, with the mullahs poised to take over, nukes and all.

The largest group of "mainstream" mullahs in Pakistan, a group of roughly 500 clerics, announced their approval of the assassination of a state governor. Because said governor supported removing the death penalty for blasphemy.

If you think we are not staring down the barrel (ooh, is that inflammatory?) of the birth of another 100 million strong theocracy, well, I admire your optimism.

And on the whole business of haters and inflammatory political speech, Jack Shafer at Slate puts it best.

Oh, and for the cultural relativists out there, you may be interested to know what the Ayatolla Sistani, Shia religious leader of Iraq, thinks about gays and board games.

On his website in 2007, Sistani called for the execution of gays in the "worst, most severe way". In response to protests, Sistani agreed to remove the fatwa from his website, but he left intact the section calling for the punishment of lesbianism...extrajudicial slaughtering of gays and lesbians is the order of the day there.

And chess, according to Sistani, is absolutely forbidden.

Oh, but what about our prison population, we are SO evil, the Americans, because of our prison population.

But, but, have you ever considered that maybe we are the only country with enough rule of law and money to actually hold and handle prisoners, unlike, say, China, where people are summarily executed, day in and day out?

That was poorly concealed sarcasm even though Reagan was being attacked for conservative views on a regualr basis (you can look up Star Wars, for one).

Hinckley was a mentally ill loner like the person who sommitted the heinous attack in AZ.

I think the bigger issue is when are we going to get someone who can actually govern instead of blaming the other party when things go wrong?

If you want to address mental illness, you can start in Portland. Police are shooting the mentally ill that we have no money to care for, but we can spend $750M (TriMet on Milwaukie MAx) or $30M on one street (CoP on SW Moody for the same project.)

Steve - There is a difference between criticism and "hate speech". I know that might be hard for some to grasp. I have never called for legal sanctions against fundamentalist behavior nor have I advocated violence against those who hold fundamentalist views. That said I will continue to exercise my First Amendment right to criticize those who would limit my rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness based on their religious views. And that is the point of civil discourse.

Max - Wow. You know the chestnut about those who assume? I don't listen to any talk radio ever. It annoys the h#)) out of me. My car tuner only has pre-sets to a number of XM music stations. And 99% of the time I have a radio on, it's in my car. the other 1% it's drowning out my jerk headed neighbors' illegal fireworks that freak out my dog.

I can tell you that I am not aware of any lefties who have a hard-on for immigrants. And by the way, I don't happen to consider myself a lefty. My political viewpoints pretty much qualify as all over the map.

"I have never called for legal sanctions against fundamentalist behavior nor have I advocated violence against those who hold fundamentalist views."

How do you feel about those who want to kill immigrants or leaglize slavery? Explain to me why that is not hate speech unless you have a specific example of the above.

I'd call it hate speech if merely meant to inflame rather than logically criticize (yes, Rush/Savage et al are just as guilty.) With those kind of comments (killing immigrants and legalizing slavery) though, I'd be hard-pressed to believe you rise above that standard.

Oh, but what about our prison population, we are SO evil, the Americans, because of our prison population.

"The main difference between nations is how they justify killing. In America, we tend to do it by claiming the other fellow was hell bent on killing us. But first, of course, we must make him out to be worse than us, more primitive, somehow incapable of rule by law. It's a fine tradition--Roman in efficiency, Greek in reasoning, and hellish in its morality."

We have spent trillions on Near Eastern carnage for over nine years. We have invaded three countries and killed hundred of thousands of civilians. A nutjob shoots a Congresswoman and others at a shopping center here in the states. I think we should put some things in perspective.

I have my doubts that the US directly killed hundreds of thousands of civilians, as I think you meant to imply. We bear indirect responsibility for the outbreak of civil war in which an estimated 78K Iraqis died at the hands of other Iraqis, as laid out in the May wikileaks docs.

The wars have been disastrous, US foreign policy in general is a disaster and has been for decades. We should have severed relations with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan years ago, and sought energy independence.

That does not alter the fact that on the domestic front, our society is a relative utopia when you consider that the bulk of the third world is slowly coalescing in to a religious and/or narco-trafficking warzone, and their civil societies are essentially disintegrating.

our society is a relative utopia when you consider that the bulk of the third world is slowly coalescing in to a religious and/or narco-trafficking warzone, and their civil societies are essentially disintegrating.

The #1 market for that "narco-trafficking" is the United States. And, the primary market for the world's largest small arms manufacturer (the United States) is...everywhere else, including Mexico. I wonder if there's any relationship between any of these things?

Steve - How do I feel about that? I feel like they need a remedial lesson in constitutional law (separation of church and state, Bill of Rights, 14th Amendment just for openers)and a major history lesson (unless we are descended from Native Americans we are all of immigrant stock and some more recent than others), and that they should study the teachings of Jesus on their own, not under the guidance of ideologues who wish to bend religion for political purposes. I've seen some of those ridiculously annotated and rewritten (say compared to King James which I am most familiar with) Bibles.

Whether you like it or not, a large percentage of fundies buy into rhetoric that lead to those beliefs. Most of them are smart enough not to share their views with those who don't agree with them

Since I am gay, I happen to consider fundies a threat to my personal freedoms so that should tell you all you need to know. Do you need a recent history lesson in Oregon ballot initiatives or can you let it rest?

Steve: You seriously think the standard of living her[e] is worse [than Pakistan]?

Allan wasn't speaking of economic conditions when he invited comparison between the US and Pakistan. He was speaking pretty clearly of using assassination as a tool to achieve political, social, and religious ends.

Fairplay - go read the end of the third clause of Article 6 and tell me what it says.
And then go read the First Amendment which is part of the Constitution and tell me what that says. And tell me how you think all that doesn't back what I am saying.

The Constitution never has been the final word on things. And it shouldn't be; that's why several amendments were added almost immediately, and now there are over two dozen.

No author of the Constitution intended that it be treated as a static document, unchangeable, forever fixed in time. No country in the world treats its constitution that way, either. And they shouldn't--such a document is meant to serve the people it's written for, not vice versa.

In other words, maybe--just maybe--a society approaching a half billion people may have different governance needs than a nation of a million or less.

Road Work

Miles run year to date: 156
At this date last year: 225
Total run in 2014: 401
In 2013: 257
In 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269